In what ways may agency administrators or program evaluators overlook the potential risks to participants in the evaluation process?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Administrators or researchers simply may not think there are any risks to participants, or they feel the risks are trivial or at best inconvenient. Administrators may trust that the researcher or their sponsoring agency would not hurt anyone or engage in dangerous behavior based on their prior relationship or reputation. For example, a well known evaluation agency may have a very good reputation, but that does not mean that their researchers are incapable of making mistakes. The administrator or researcher may be motivated by positive and pure motives such that he/she feels it is inconceivable to cause harm. Those leading the study may not be aware of certain risks for certain populations because they have not taken the time to understand the agency’s culture, practices and client background. Based on their analysis of the risks, they may believe that any risks are overridden by the benefits of the research. The evaluator may believe that certain steps designed to protect human subjects would compromise the study and dilute the findings. For example, if a subject knows that the purpose of the evaluation is to improve the program, they may try to make the program look good if he/she feels he/she will benefit from positive results.